I really don’t like the health care bill that the House of Representatives passed and sent to the Senate for conference. Really. Do. Not. Like. And it’s not just the Stupak Amendment, a cruel bit of pernicion foisted on the Democrats in order to gain Catholic Church acceptance and support for passage. No, it’s much more than that. It doesn’t spread the risk and pool of insured enough to make a dent in rising health care payment costs. If the bill were to be effective, it would create a single pool of insureds with a membership of 330 million people. One pool, all risks covered.

Five years ago I was working for a small business. I have to carry insurance for the kids as part of my divorce decree. My boss’s health insurance agent calculated the increase in premiums over the prior year, and one of the factors involved is what the carrier’s outlay had been before for doing the job we were paying them to do.

I was working in a body shop, and we dealt with insurance carriers, as they are the third-party payer in accident claims. We would sell the service to the customer but our estimates to the insurance companies, and had to justify every expense for each repair. Often adjusters would arbitrarily cut our estimates in order to bring their claims costs down to a level they had budgeted for the year. In body shops, there is no protocol to go back to a customer and bill for the difference once the claim had been settled (unless the customer had requested repairs to damage unrelated to the service). Body shops take the loss on such adjustments. Insurance companies also controlled the rates they paid to us, claiming comparisons to the local market. Funny thing is, they were the ones that set the rates for the local market. I could see a conflict of interest.

The customers were not concerned with the total cost of the repair as long as they got their cars back in pre-collision condition. For the insurers, it is a sweetheart deal because they control the repair. I also depended on total billings for each month to determine bonuses, and I was not happy when an insurance company adjusted a final bill because it affected me. It was a battle with them, and we had only a few insurance companies to deal with because for each state each insurance company has only one pool: all the drivers in the state who buy their coverage.

Auto insurance and health insurance are completely separate classes of commodities, but I learned from my experience not to trust either to have the customer’s interests at heart. I learned to trust them not to have the shop’s best interests at heart. I learned that they have their stockholders’ best interests at heart. Insurance companies have to be careful to serve their property and casualty customers’ needs, because it is relatively easy to change carriers. Want to rate shop on insurance? Call a number and if you find a rate you like, pay for it and switch. For those of us who rely on group coverage through our employers, there is a different story.

We are limited to specific benefits enrollment periods, and we can’t change our insurance outside of those periods unless we have a “major qualifying event.” If an insurance company does something in January that a customer doesn’t like, then it’s something to keep in mind until the next November when the enrollment period begins again. The company will still get the premiums over the next 11 months. It’s a sweetheart deal for the insurance companies, and in the meantime, the customer may be fighting collections from the health care provider because they are jumping through hoops to prove that a procedure was a necessary and proper step in healing you.

What that meant for me and my co-workers was that because the spouse of one of the employers had been through treatments for brain cancer, our premiums were jumping 75%. The insurance company had done what it was paid to do, and then told my boss that they were getting a raise. They can do that. It really made things tight for me, because in addition to child support I was also paying a significant portion of my family’s health coverage. Our pool was small, and like all small business pools was overwhelmed by the needs of the insurance company.

The bill that passed through Congress does not address that. It doesn’t address the issue of small pools. In fact, it seems to make the problem even worse, because now it mandates that people carry insurance and I haven’t heard of anything that prevents them from determining how they determine the pools. It excludes denial of coverage but doesn’t address whether or not insurance companies can place such risk into separate actuarial tables and charge whatever premiums they choose.

No, it is not a cost-savings measure for those of us who live in the country that pays more than any other country in the world for health care insurance and still has millions uninsured. It does serve the insurance companies very well. I was supposed to celebrate that the House had passed a bill, but was in fact rather disgusted that we are still working with a monstrosity with an amendment that excludes payments for abortion services while allowing coverage for ED treatments (which is a good thing for many people, but it is inequitable treatment which targets a specific class of people). We are supposed to accept reassurances that this amendment will be struck before the president signs it, but I am not feeling so secure.

No, I want to see a system that pays for health care for everyone who has a need and for those who don’t need it now to have the assurance that it will be there in case they need it. I want a plan that will increase the coverage risk pool to an entire population without dividing groups into isolated pools for which insurance companies can put the screws to employers. I want employers to be able to spend more on labor and wages than on insurance. I also want the self-employed and the unemployed to be able to have health care coverage. And I love that I live in a market-based economy, but I just don’t have the level of trust I should have in order to accept a new roll-out that doesn’t fix the basic problem.

This is not realistic. The idea of a single-payer system was slapped back by the White House and the congressional Democrats as “undoable.” It was considered to be only wanted by the “left of the left” in Rahm Emanuel’s words. I do have a wonderful surprise for you. Minnesota can lead the way on this, and it may happen far sooner than any of us expect.

Minnesota, our Minnesota can lead the way!

Last Wednesday at the District 51 DFL monthly meeting, at which I am the Affirmative Action Officer because I am “the atheist,” a volunteer who is working for State Senator John Marty’s Minnesota Health Plan bill came to speak to us and gave us the wonderful news that a plan that will work for health care coverage is making great progress through both the Senate and the Legislature. And it does just those things that I ask. Here is a brief rundown:

The MN Health Plan (MnHP) would be a single, statewide plan that would cover all Minnesotans for all their medical needs. Under the plan, patients would be able to see the medical providers of their choice when they need care, and their coverage by the health plan would not end when they lose their job or switch to a new employer. Consumers would use the same doctors and medical professionals, the same hospitals and clinics, but all the payments, covering all of the costs, would be made by the MnHP, and everyone would be covered.

The plan would be funded by all Minnesotans, based on the ability to pay, and would cover all health care costs, replacing all premiums currently paid by employees and employers, as well as all co-payments, deductibles, all payments for care by the uninsured or under-insured, and all costs of government health care programs.

Although the MN Health Plan is not cheap, it is significantly less expensive than our current system, and it would provide a full range of health care services to everyone, greatly improving the health of the population.

I’ll repeat this so that you get my emphasis: This is a real health plan that is making its way through the House and the Senate and has broad support. This is a list of the coauthors in both the Minnesota House and Senate. There are Democrats and Republicans on this list of coauthors. The plan has to make it through a few more committees before it will make it to the floor, and they will need some phone calls down at the capitol in order to get it there. Even though the 2010 session will be short, there will be time to work on it and get it further before the mandated end of session in May. Call your legislators and tell them that you support them if they are on the list, or tell them that you want them to coauthor this bill. I’ll work on Tim Mahoney, you work on the rest.

The bill will not pass this next session for this main reason: They know that the current governor is running for president, and we also know that Pawlenty is not likely to screw up his conservative bona fides by passing any sort of “socialized ObamaCare plan.” He would lose millions in campaign funds from his ultra-conservative base of donors. So, it needs to pass in the 2011 session, which seems a long ways away. There is something very important that you need to consider as well. None of the Republican senators and legislators running for governor are on the list of coauthors.

In order to get this done, we must have a DFL governor by January of 2011. We must have a governor who will put Minnesotans over national aspirations and will do the right thing. Do your volunteer work for a DFL gubernatorial candidate of your choosing, concentrate as much time and money as you have on this in the next year, and don’t let the Republicans win this one again.

Caucus in February and get active and involved.

I always hate one thing at political rallies. Some candidate will stand up and say “This is the most important election of our lives!” Every year. Is the 2010 election as important as all the rest? I’ll let our readers decide, and then pass this around to everyone you know who wants workable single-payer health insurance.  Those lovely Canadians started province by province when they moved into what they now have, and this is the way that I have thought it should be done.  If we prove in Minnesota that it works, then the rest of the country will follow suit.

I think we can do it. Change my mind, okay? Change me from “think” to “know.” We can do it!

“Is it important to give people a choice of a public option.”

The fact that in the same poll, 48% are “for” a public option and 42% are “against” a public option is a testament to…something. But maybe we won’t go there right now.

Either way, the writing is on the wall: The people want a public option with the health care insurance reform that is about to happen.

They also want the reform to be real, to not be watered down by the insurance companies, and they want it now.

What I’m working on is my list of candidates to force into retirement over the next few years. Olympia Snow has acted abominably. She as wasted our time and energy beyond belief. She has indicated that she has a very, very narrow range of what she will accept and it is clear that she is at odds with not only her own constituents but also the entire nation. According to Chuck Todd (via Facebook, as I write this), Lieberman is going to vote with the GOP to filibuster the bill that is currently moving towards the Senate floor because, again, he has a very, very narrow range of details that he will accept. Senator Max Baucus voted against a bill much like the one we are ending up with shortly because he had a very, very narrow range of acceptable combinations of who would vote for what before he would grow the balls necessary to say, “Yes,” with most of the Democrats instead of, “No,” with all of the Republicans.

These three politicians…Snow, Leiberman, and Baucus…are on my list. I will blog against them; I will raise money for whomever opposes them. They have hijacked our system and now they will have to pay.

I know that my own efforts, by themselves, will be irrelevant. This will be like spitting in the ocean. But here’s the thing: In a year, or three, or five, the fact that these three (and a few others as yet to be sorted out) decided that their own stupid-ass details and attention-getting whinging were more important than health care reform will be forgotten.

Unless a handful of us make sure that does not happen. Fellow bloggers, help me out on this.

Here’s Rachel:

Seventy-three percent of Americans support this statement:

“Is it important to give people a choice of a public option.”

Why are we even talking about this?

This particular piece by Rachel Maddow does a good job of summarizing the political situation at this particular historic juncture using a fanciful running sports metaphor.

Delay, define, and derail. Indeed.

One of the issues being discussed is allowing a public option in the bill, but then allowing individual states…the stupid states like Texas, Florida, and Louisiana, I assume…to not partake in that. I’m all for doing that as long as we also sign two agreements: 1) Nobody from the stupid states can move to a smart state, ever, and 2) Real election reform has to happen in the stupid states so the people who tend to not be represented in the elections, but who will be screwed by an opt-out option, get to partake in electing their representatives next time around.

In the end, the politicians who are going to decide what this bill will look like, and exactly how to crack the heads that will be cracked to make it happen, know that the public option is popular. Everyone wants it. Like Keith says:

My theory is that the negotiators have been claiming that the public option is in play because they have some kind of secret strategy that will guarantee us a public option. We will only understand what this plan is with historical hindsight.

The backup plan by the Republicans: They will repeal the bill. Here is the plan from the guy who, sadly, could probably pull this off if we keep pandering to the right in this country:

One may well ask, why are Republicans like New Gingrich, who are not presently in office, telling us that the main thing they want to see happen is a rollback of reforms that have not even happened yet, when what we really should be doing is asking very different questions. Like this.

Approximately one half of this country wants health care insurance reform because they realize that the health care insurance industry has become a parasite on one sixth of our economy to the detriment of our ability to provide for ourselves as a people and to stand with moral equivalence in the ranks of industrialized nations. The other half of this country is senselessly screaming, in the shrillest voice possible, to oppose health care reform because they see any reform of any program by a black president to be a form of contamination of our white society.

It would not matter if the major issue of the day was health care insurance reform, banking reform, restructuring of the military, civil rights reform, detente, reengagement with some isolated foreign policy, peace in the Mideast, or whether to have peas with your mash potatoes. Obama is the Antichrist, he is working for the lizard people, and anything he does or says is wrong. And he’s a black guy.

In observing the vitriolic, over-the-top fight to NOT have heath care insurance reform, organized by the status quo but carried out by the working class slobs who have been enamored with the Republican Party since Rush Limbaugh became its titular head a couple of decades back, you are observing the single most powerful act of spite ever carried out by any group of humans in all of history.

Please call your representative in the House and Senate today. Remember, you have two senators and one representative in the House. Three phone calls. It’s kinda now or never.

Betty McCollum was a school teacher in North St. Paul before she entered politics, and she still runs her events with full command and control of the situation. She owns her events and, without raising her voice, makes it clear that unacceptable behavior is, well, unacceptable.

In my post regarding Michele Bachmann’s event in Lake Elmo’s Oakland Junior High School auditorium, I hadn’t said that the Washington County Sheriff’s Department was heavily present. They were there to signal that no unruliness would be tolerated. McCollum didn’t need any cops. She had her own control and command. She also had the foresight to hold her Town Hall in a chapel. Even though the Weyerhauser Chapel at Macalaster College in St. Paul is a nondenominational chapel, it is still a chapel, and people tend to think of chapels as being places of quiet respect and contemplation. Believe it or not, even I, as an ex-Catholic Atheist, have a reverence for buildings with altars.

The organizers added one additional tool to keep the discussion civil. They handed out tickets in advance to people who chose to have input at the meeting. They were the double ticket sort, numbered and separated by perforations. Those who wished to have three minutes at the microphone were to put one half of their double ticket in a basket. During the show, they would pull three tickets at a time and the holders of the matching numbered ticket were to be ready to talk. This way, there would be no jostling lines at the mics as has happened in other town halls.

McCollum’s constituents signed in at one table and the auslanders signed in at another. Each sign-in sheet had space for comment, for those who weren’t to get a chance to speak. I filled out the box with this message for the Congresswoman:

The current bill, HR 3200, is too large and unwieldy and should be scrapped. In its place, Congress should authorize block grants to states which would then be required to develop Universal Coverage plans as testing grounds. Minnesota should be one of these states, and should follow the model that Senator John Marty has developed.

I do think that the current debate has gone far afield from anything that will solve the problem of millions of underinsured and uninsured Americans. I think that even a “reform” of the insurance system with a public option is doomed to fail, because it is going to be drawn favorably for the pharmaceutical giants and the insurance companies that have settled in on K Street to “negotiate” with the Democrats. The result so far, has been an agreement that in exchange for dropping the “preexisting conditions” and practices of rescission, they would only need to be responsible for 65% of the costs of their customer’s care. They didn’t concede anything towards controlling the cost of premiums. They promised eighty billion dollars towards closing the “doughnut holes” of prescription costs, in exchange for not allowing negotiation on drug prices.

The current bill is loaded in favor of those who are footing the bill to fight it, and whether that is to make them look good by “giving in” to something they want when this is all over and done, I can’t say. I think it is something is guaranteed to fail in solving the coverage crisis. It’s time to start from scratch and make it simple.

This is what I wanted to tell Betty McCollum. I hoped that my number would be drawn, but considering the turnout and my own history with winning any sort of drawings, expected that reality would prevent me from having my say to the whole group.

I found the next line, the one for entering the event when the doors opened. I was standing between two groups. One group was a pair of seniors, Republican women, friendly women actually, who were there to protect their Medicare. They were worried about the deficit and raising taxes. I talked to them about how our current system is damaging our manufacturers’ competitiveness on the international market. I told them the one about how Toyotas built in Japan cost less in terms of overall labor cost, because insurance is covered by the center-right government of Japan, than GM cars built in the United States. Picking up the tab is expensive for those of our factory owners who cover their employees’ premiums.

The group behind me were nurses, they were health care practitioners who have seen the effects of bureaucrats coming between doctors and patients. One of the group behind me said she was glad I am on their side, because, as she put it, I am “articulate.” I almost made a remark about how our president, too, is articulate, but then thought better of myself.

The reporter from FOX9 news found one of the few conservatives in the crowd, who took the opportunity to say, “I think that we really need to stand up and prevent this indoctrination and socialism.” I chortled, but I am sure that it was edited out. I don’t watch FOX9 news, so I am not sure what they played and what they left out. There was also a crowd of protesters who were holding up signs, including one that said, “The Nanny State is Dangerous To Your Health.” I shook my head. Nanny state? Another held up a sign that was a Photoshopped image of Obama as “The Joker” from The Dark Knight. The caption read “Socialist,” which I thought of as odd, because in The Dark Knight, the Joker claimed to represent anarchy, while Batman took on the role of the authoritarian. I wondered whether the person who held the sign had actually seen the movie. The proper caption for the picture as originally published is “Why So Socialist?” That one makes more sense in the context of the movie.

The person who had this sign was allowed to take it inside to the event. Now, those of you familiar with the Joker as played by Heath Ledger can understand why it may upset some people. It looks a bit like “blackface” theatrical makeup, only in negative. It looks as if Obama is a black person trying to be white. I knew that this was not the sign carrier’s intent, but others in the chapel objected and asked him to remove the sign. I found myself in the odd position of siding with conservatives on this one. Part of it was due to the fact that I saw more offensive signs, and those weren’t raising ire. Another part is that I am not for promoting censorship. I calmed what was about to turn into a heated argument by explaining to a few people that I was an Obama supporter and I didn’t find the sign offensive. It’s not like the caption was “We Need a Great White Hope.”

I was sitting next to a conservative, who buffered me during the conversation from a redneck who, during the rising argument over the sign, managed to croak out the words, “I am offended that liberals exist,” in response to someone else being offended by the sign. I wonder whether he thinks abortion should be prohibited only for conservatives, but that those of us born destined to be liberals should be thwarted by D & C at birth. I think that he meant to say is, “I am offended that liberalism exists,” but I can’t be sure.

Now, on to the event itself. Betty came out and talked about the problems that have led to a crisis of health care coverage and outlined what she believes to be the solution. She is in support of the monstrosity that is HR 3200, but pointed out that it is not yet a complete document and that in September it is likely to see major changes. She reiterated that Senators and Congressional Reps are in their districts to hear what their constituents have to say about it, so that they can take that back with them. And then the drawings began to find out who would get to have their say.

Mr. “Offended That Liberals Exist” was one of the first three to speak, and told the heartbreaking tale that he had switched jobs and had to change insurance and that one of his kids had a preexisting condition and that he and his wife struggled to pay all the bills, but dammit, this is America! and he didn’t expect anyone else to be responsible for his problems and he doesn’t expect anyone to be responsible for them now and they need to fix health insurance but not make it socialist! “Good points,” Betty responded.

Other people said they didn’t want any of their money going towards killing babies. Make sure that there are no payments for abortions (but continue funding the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, where, yes, children are getting killed, which is okay because they are collateral damage in the War against Terrorism). “There are no provisions in the bill for funding abortions,” Betty told the questioner.

Lots of questions from conservatives afraid that the bill would take away their freedoms to choose their doctors, their insurance company, their deductible. Some people wanted à la carte insurance because they didn’t think they would need coverage for pregnancy and childbirth (which sounds like people who think they shouldn’t have to pay for education in their property taxes if they don’t have any children in school).

Democrats. No need to hide. We won in 2008!

Betty McCollum did a lot of assuring and comforting of conservatives in the crowd–that the bill would not damage them in any way, that there would be no “death panels,” that the special needs patients wouldn’t have to beg a panel for care, that they would be able to stay with their current plan, that Medicare would be fixed so that Minnesota hospitals are no longer punished for being efficient. She didn’t say anything to show those of us who had campaigned and doorknocked and phone-banked to help Democrats get elected in November that we were going to be heard this September. She didn’t say anything about fighting for a public option, let alone the one fix that would actually take care of the problems, single-payer health care, such as the type that our top competitors on the world market offer.

Single-payer was not even discussed, nor was the language part of the bill in Congress. It is a topic shunned out of fear by the Democrats, because…well, because…because…I just don’t know. It is an untouchable topic in Congress and the Senate, and it is what the people who worked so hard in November want. But maybe we were just the mice who had chosen the Black Cats over the White Cats.

I’m really frustrated with the Democrats.

When I was standing in the line for Fourth District constituents to sign in, an older gentleman was complaining that Obama is the most socialist president we have ever had. I laughed at him, and asked him whether he was serious, and he said he was. I told him that he really should ask progressives and liberals what we think of that. He was clueless as to what I mean.

We have been shut out, not by the conservatives, but by the Democrats. We have one Senator who is shy of leading the charge even for public option reforms, instead opting to wait until the final bill before she will commit to voting for it. We need to remind them that they can’t take us for granted, and they had better do what we elected them to do.

We need leadership, and if the Congressional Democrats are going to forego it, then Stephanie has the way to lead, and not follow, in this debate.

One of the sources said White House officials are “deep in conversations” with Snowe on a much smaller health care bill than Obama originally envisioned.

The modified proposal would include insurance reforms, such as preventing insurance companies from denying coverage to people with pre-existing conditions, according to the source.

The potential deal would give insurance companies a defined period to make such changes in order to help cover more people and drive down long-term costs. But if those changes failed to occur within the defined period, a so-called “trigger” would provide for creating a public option to force change on the insurance companies, the source said.

Snowe is pivotal to the debate because she may be Obama’s last possibility for getting a Republican senator to support his push for a health care overhaul.

This isn’t what I voted for. I did not vote for a man who allows his administration to solicit opportunities to water down the initiatives he promised. I did not vote for a man who reaches across the aisle to find a place to sit. I did not vote for a few more years. I did not vote for “Well, we could.”

Oh, I can’t say it nearly as well as Anne Lamott already did.

We did not know exactly how you would proceed to restore our beloved Constitution. It seemed beyond redemption, like my kitchen floor did briefly last week after my dog, Bodhi, accidentally ate 24 corn bread muffins. You said you would push back your sleeves and begin, that it would take all of us working harder than we ever had before, but that you would lead. While acknowledging the financial and moral devastation of the last eight years, you said you would start by giving your people healthcare. You would do battle with the conservatives and insurance companies. You said in your beautiful way many times that this was the overarching moral and spiritual issue of our times, and we understood this to mean that you took this to be your Selma, your Little Rock.

I hate to sound like a betrayed 7-year-old, but you said. And we believed you. Now you seem to have abandoned the dream. That is why moderates and liberals and progressives like myself all seem a little tense this summer. It is time to call your spirit back. We will be here to help when you get back from vacation. We want to help you get over the disappointment of Mr. Grassley’s cold shoulder, of Mr. Enzi blowing you off, even that nice Olympia Snowe standing you up. We can and will take to the streets again, march and hold peaceful rallies, go door to door, donate to any causes that will help get out the truth of what a public option would mean. But we need you to shake off the dust of the journey and remember the promises of Dr. King, and we need you to lead us toward what is no longer so distant a shore.

And on the subject of wanting bipartisanship:

Of the total votes cast that long-ago November day, I’m guessing that about 1,575 people wanted you to try to reconcile the toxic bipartisanship that culminated in those Sarah Palin rallies.

The other 66,880,655 of us wanted universal healthcare.

We still do. In very durable results, more than three-quarters of the U.S. wants at least a public option, including more than 60% of Republicans polled. This means that if the Senate were stocked with the Republicans who were asked for their opinions, they would have the necessary supermajority to shut down debate and just vote in a public option.

In fact, there are only three groups that don’t seem to be in favor of a public option: insurance companies, corporate media and our elected representatives.

And it only takes a few minutes of cable news viewing to arrive at the assumption that the “centrist” position on healthcare reform, according to Brooks and other establishment people, is a bill without a public option. The health insurance lobby in collusion with both the corrupt and spineless Blue Dogs and the lying hacks who control the cartoonish Republican Party have successfully convinced large chunks of Washington that the public option is some sort of ultra-left concoction manufactured inside the secret underground Wellstone Memorial Lib-ratory located beneath Howard Dean’s cavernous walk-in Birkenstock closet.

The reality, however, is that a healthcare reform bill with a robust public option is both extraordinarily popular and fiscally responsible, while, on the other hand, the kind of “centrist” bill that David Brooks wants is actually more expensive and generally more corrupt. In other words, a bill without the public option can hardly be called “centrist” by any definition of the term.

If Brooks wants “fiscal restraint,” as he writes in his column, he’d endorse the public option. What I’m about to write is old news, but with the apparent prevalence of breaking news stories on cable news about bears wandering into suburban swimming pools, I suppose it’s easy for people to forget. Nevertheless, here it is. You may recall that the CBO scored the Kennedy HELP bill as costing around $1 trillion over ten years. But that was an early version of the bill without a public option included. What did the bill cost with the public option inserted into the mix?

$400 billion less.

Less!

Why don’t the politicians support a public option? They’re isolated. They’re surrounded by people who thought “Yes, we can” was a brilliant stroke of marketing, period, and the energy around the election was an unsustainable fluke. They’re hounded by (and identify with) people who lead industries that don’t bear nearly the same risk we do in health care costs and for whom a doubling of health care costs in a decade is a mere annoyance. They’re used to laughing at the idealists, because for the last eight years, they really couldn’t get anything done.

And, maybe, we’re talking too much to each other and not enough to them. We need to puncture that isolation. Don’t assume your representatives know where you stand. Complain to your local media when they insist on covering the controversy instead of the groundswell. Sign MoveOn’s petition. The text is very simple.

“President Obama, we’re counting on you to fight for bold change on health care–including a strong public health insurance option. It’s the key to breaking the stranglehold that private insurers have over our health care system.”

Donate to help them advertise. And don’t forget to tell your health insurance story and your child’s and your parents’. Stories are important. They bind us together in this. They carry a weight that even our numbers can’t always convey and penetrate where we can’t always go. The health insurance industry may have the money. They have the media. They may even have the politicians. But they don’t have the stories, and they can’t control ours except by making things better.

That’s exactly what we want done, and we’re not about to compromise.

Update: Someone in the comments mentioned hope. Not to pick on her, but hope isn’t going to cut it. In the words of the immortal Shel Silverstein:

Well it wasn’t too very long ago you know some folks walked with a hi-dee-ho
And other folks walked around kind of low
Sayin’ Yowzah and Sho nuff and Yassuh boss
It was ashes to ashes and dust to dust and they didn’t believe in makin’ a fuss
So they quietly moved to the back of the bus
They just say Yowzah and Sho nuff and Yassuh boss
And when things got rough they did a little prayin’
Little arm wavin’ and a little bit of swayin’
Didn’t do no good they kept right on a sayin’
Sayin’ Yowzah and Sho nuff and Yassuh boss
So they all went out and did a little standin’ little less askin’ and a lot more demandin’
Little less liftin’ and a little less totin’ a lot more thinkin’ and a lot more votin’
A lot less hopin’ a lot less waitin’
A whole lot more demonstratin’a lot less pearly gate’n’
A lot more fightin’ and a lot more walkin’ until finally no one at all was talkin’
Like Yowzah and Sho nuff and Yassuh boss
The end of this story is plain to see they finally achieved equality
And now like you and me they can stand up strong and free
And say Yes sir and Of course sir and Anything you say JB

Clearly, there is more work to be done.

Art historians claim Van Gogh’s ear ‘cut off by Gauguin’

Vincent van Gogh’s fame may owe as much to a legendary act of self-harm, as it does to his self-portraits. But, 119 years after his death, the tortured post-Impressionist’s bloody ear is at the centre of a new controversy, after two historians suggested that the painter did not hack off his own lobe but was attacked by his friend, the French artist Paul Gauguin.

According to official versions, the disturbed Dutch painter cut off his ear with a razor after a row with Gauguin in 1888. Bleeding heavily, Van Gogh then walked to a brothel and presented the severed ear to an astonished prostitute called Rachel before going home to sleep in a blood-drenched bed.

The Guardian

Astrologer: Stars say Franken will win June 14

The stars indicate that on or about June 14, a decision by the Minnesota Supreme Court will make Al Franken a U.S. Senator. That’s the view of astrology blogger Terry Lamb, who cautions that “[i]f the senate seat remains in limbo past this time, the eclipses will come into play.”

Minnesota Independent

Buy one, get two free at Fox Nation

This was screencapped today from Fox Nation, Fox News’ month old conservative opinion site, which is already being pegged for something racial today. Notice anything?

The Raw Story

Protesters Disrupt Health Care Hearing

A series of protesters demanding single-payer health care coverage disrupted a Senate Finance Committee roundtable on health care reform Tuesday. At the beginning of the hearing Tuesday morning, a man stood and yelled, “So let me get this straight — you have 15 seats at the table and not one for single payer? Why is that?”

Huffington Post

Torture memo authors unlikely to be prosecuted

Bush administration attorneys who wrote memos authorizing torture should not be prosecuted, a Justice Department report will recommend according to sources close to an investigation.

“The report by the Office of Professional Responsibility, an internal ethics unit within the Justice Department, is also likely to ask that state bar associations consider possible disciplinary action, including reprimands or even disbarment, for some of the lawyers involved in writing the legal opinions, the officials said,” reported the New York Times.

The Raw Story

The Quiet Coup

The crash has laid bare many unpleasant truths about the United States. One of the most alarming, says a former chief economist of the International Monetary Fund, is that the finance industry has effectively captured our government—a state of affairs that more typically describes emerging markets, and is at the center of many emerging-market crises. If the IMF’s staff could speak freely about the U.S., it would tell us what it tells all countries in this situation: recovery will fail unless we break the financial oligarchy that is blocking essential reform. And if we are to prevent a true depression, we’re running out of time.

The Atlantic

Administration Seeks an Out On Bailout Rules for Firms

Administration officials have concluded that this approach is vital for persuading firms to participate in programs funded by the $700 billion financial rescue package.

The administration believes it can sidestep the rules because, in many cases, it has decided not to provide federal aid directly to financial companies, the sources said. Instead, the government has set up special entities that act as middlemen, channeling the bailout funds to the firms and, via this two-step process, stripping away the requirement that the restrictions be imposed, according to officials.

Washington Post

Bailout Watchdog: Treasury’s stonewalling

Elizabeth Warren, the law professor appointed as Congress’s oversight czar on bank bailouts, blasted the Treasury Department — saying new legislation might be needed to give the House and Senate more access to details of the $700 billion rescue program.

Warren, testifying before the Senate Finance Committee Tuesday morning, said keeping Congress in the loop isn’t a “priority” of Secretary Tim Geithner — and suggested a possible “next step” would be to pass legislation that would “require [Treasury] to consult” with her.

Glenn Thrush

Where Wall Street Trades in Political Currency

With sweeping reforms coming, the Wall Street-Washington connection may be more important than ever, and political connections may be the new currency for deal makers.

Below is a matrix of Wall Street chiefs and private-equity bosses, as well as their personal contributions to politicians in 2007 and 2008, as recorded by the Center for Responsive Politics. The list, which gives politicians’ titles at the time, also illustrates the political action committee money given by each chief’s firm and its employees.

NY Times

The Definition of Insanity

A few months ago, I did some posts and TV appearances discussing some of the problems that would inevitably occur with the appointment of Goldman Sachs lobbyist Mark Patterson as the chief of staff at the Treasury Department. As Mother Jones subsequently reported, we’ve already seen some of those problems happen.

Open Left

Mr. Taleb Goes to Washington

Nassim Taleb is an unlikely choice to play the Jimmy Stewart role in a 21st-century remake of the Depression-era classic Mr. Smith Goes to Washington. But the tale of a naive do-gooder who tries to remind a corrupt political class of its obligations was re-enacted this week when Taleb attended the Wall Street Journal’s Future of Finance conference in Washington, D.C.

The Big Money

Was Eliot Spitzer Taken Out Because He Was Going to Bust AIG?

Eliot Spitzer is back and he’s talking. The thought of this, no doubt, brings a small shiver to the boardrooms of some of the perps walking around trying to figure out how to hide the money this week. Today Edward Liddy testified that there have been death threats made to or about executives who received bonuses, so no names will be put on the record, but these anonymous players must know that the jig is up in the land of easy-money. Isn’t what to do a no-brainer for these great Americans?

AlterNet

Specter Announces His Intention To Vote Against Employee Free Choice Act

Today on the Senate floor, Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA) announced his intention to vote against cloture on the Employee Free Choice Act. Specter was the only Republican to vote for cloture when the measure was last considered in 2007. During his announcement, Specter noted his previous support for EFCA, but suggested that the current condition of the economy makes “this a particularly bad time to enact employee’s choice legislation”

Think Progress

Recruited to Serve and Sniff — Again

The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan aren’t just forcing thousands of soldiers and Marines to deploy for two and three tours. The sacrifice is being shared by a key, and growing, part of the U.S. military: highly trained German shepherds and Belgian Malinois. In a war with no front lines, they have become valuable at sniffing out makeshift bombs, which cause most U.S. casualties.

Washington Post

Around the Country, Calls for Lawmakers to Address “Real Problems, Not Imaginary Ones”

As several states enter critical phases in their legislative sessions, the debate for one of the most controversial election reforms continues to dominate headlines and legislative hearings. This year, more than 26 states introduced legislation to go above and beyond federal election law relating to voter ID, despite near consensus among voting rights advocates that it hurts the process far more than it helps. Last week, the hysteria around voter ID reached an all time high in six states, evoking public concern from advocates and citizens alike.

Open Left

The Woman Who Could Nail Bush: Are the Worst of the Torture Memos Still to Come?

On March 19, the nomination of Indiana University law professor Dawn Johnsen to head the OLC was endorsed by the Judiciary Committee with every Republican voting against her and Sen. Arlen Spector (R-PA) abstaining. The nomination was to have been brought to the Senate floor for a vote on Monday and then again on Wednesday, but it has been held back. Republican leaders, it appears, are playing with the notion of making Johnsen the target of their first filibuster.

AlterNet

Insurers shun those taking certain meds

Trying to buy health insurance on your own and have gallstones? You’ll automatically be denied coverage. Rheumatoid arthritis? Automatic denial. Severe acne? Probably denied. Do you take metformin, a popular drug for diabetes? Denied. Use the anti-clotting drug Plavix or Seroquel, prescribed for anti-psychotic or sleep problems? Forget about it.

Miami Herald

Almost half of Boston teens surveyed blame Rihanna for Chris Brown attack

This is not the kind of news I like to hear on a Monday morning. (Or I guess any morning for that matter.)

Feministing

KLo: Victim-blaming is feminists’ fault

For serious. I know I’m late on this one, but I just had to write something. (And no, it’s not because the article is from the same woman who called me a “bridezilla” for daring to question wedding culture.)

Feministing

Sarah Haskins in Target Women: Snapped

There’s a special time in every woman’s life when she snaps and murders someone. The Oxygen Network helps you prepare for it on their real-life crime show, ‘Snapped.’

Current

The Juárez Murders

Sexism, corporate greed, and drug trafficking make Juárez a deadly town for Mexico’s women. Hundreds are dead, but the killers remain free.

Amnesty International USA

Afghan leader accused of bid to ‘legalise rape’

Afghanistan’s President, Hamid Karzai, has signed a law which “legalises” rape, women’s groups and the United Nations warn. Critics claim the president helped rush the bill through parliament in a bid to appease Islamic fundamentalists ahead of elections in August.

The Independent

Obama Responds To Afghan Law That Legalizes Rape: ‘I Think This Law Is Abhorrent’

At a news conference in Strasbourg, France, this morning, President Obama discussed NATO efforts in Afghanistan and secured the commitment of NATO allies to send 5,000 more troops to Afghanistan. Fox News’ Major Garrett asked Obama what he thinks of a new Afghanistan law that legalizes rape.

Think Progress

Kansas “late-term” abortion doctor acquitted

George Tiller, who U.S. anti-abortion groups consider a prime offender, was found innocent on 19 misdemeanor charges that he violated a state law that only allows late-term abortions if two independent physicians agree the procedure is necessary to save a woman’s life or prevent “substantial and irreversible” harm to “a major bodily function.”

Reuters

Women/Minority Ph.D.s in Science and Engineering

I happened upon a list of figures that display lots of information about who majors in science and engineering (S&E), all available at the NSF page on Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering.

Sociological Images

Women Pay The Price For Health Insurance

During the last economic bust, I got laid off and couldn’t afford the monthly COBRA payments for my health insurance. I applied for an individual plan through Blue Cross.

I was 28 at the time and had no health problems. I was thin and athletic. In fact, I’d done a triathlon and biked from San Francisco to Los Angeles twice.

I got a letter from Blue Cross saying I was denied.

MPR

“Boys Fix Things. Girls Need Things Fixed.”

Lordo sent in an image found at Blame it on the Voices that shows pages from what is described as a “1970s children’s book.” They helpfully instruct kids as to what boys and girls are like:

Sociological Images

New women’s soccer league takes world view

The Los Angeles Sol makes its debut today — a new team in a new league in an old sport in a country that has yet to fully embrace the idea of kicking a round ball across a grass field.

We are talking about soccer, specifically women’s soccer, and while the U.S. went delirious over the likes of American stars Mia Hamm, Julie Foudy, Michelle Akers and all the rest of 1999 Women’s World Cup winners, a decade has slipped by since then.

LA Times